From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26536 invoked by alias); 3 Jul 2007 03:57:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 26527 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jul 2007 03:57:06 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtpout1b.BAYAREA.NET (HELO smtpout1.bayarea.net) (209.128.100.196) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 03:57:05 +0000 Received: from myaccount.bayarea.net (myaccount.bayarea.net [209.128.116.10]) by smtpout1.bayarea.net (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l633ueHi007592; Mon, 2 Jul 2007 20:56:40 -0700 Received: from myaccount.bayarea.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by myaccount.bayarea.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l633r4vS020859; Mon, 2 Jul 2007 20:53:04 -0700 Received: (from apache@localhost) by myaccount.bayarea.net (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id l633r3I2020858; Mon, 2 Jul 2007 20:53:03 -0700 Received: from adsl-070-147-160-035.sip.aby.bellsouth.net (adsl-070-147-160-035.sip.aby.bellsouth.net [70.147.160.35]) by myaccount.bayarea.net (IMP) with HTTP for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2007 20:53:03 -0700 Message-ID: <1183434783.4689c81fa4016@myaccount.bayarea.net> Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 03:57:00 -0000 From: Michael Eager To: Mark Kettenis Cc: drow@false.org, gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB in C++ References: <46866F20.2010902@eagercon.com> <20070701205355.GC24316@caradoc.them.org> <200707020721.l627LAR3001590@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <200707020721.l627LAR3001590@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.5 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-07/txt/msg00027.txt.bz2 Quoting Mark Kettenis : > > Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 16:53:55 -0400 > > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > I'm in favor of switching to C++. I'm not going to argue about it if > > others disagree, but I'll offer to do most of the work if the > > consensus is positive. > > My position on this subject has not been changed. The more C++ code I > see, the more convinced I get that the language should die. I, too, have worked on convoluted and poorly written C++ programs. That's partially poor programming practices, rather than the language. Trying to use every feature in the language is not a good plan. The features which recommend C++ are classes and the encapsulation and data hiding which it offers. Along with this comes inlining and error checking. A limited use of inheritance is useful. Features which I would avoid are templates, overloading, and the STL. I think that implementing the parts of GDB which attempt to emulate classes in C++ would have benefits in clarity and performance. -- Michael Eager eager@eagercon.com 1960 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306 650-325-8077